Chelsea Manning

Judge (COL) Denise Lind is going to issue PFC Manning’s sentence here in the next few minutes (1000hrs Eastern time).

A few quick notes–PFC Manning has 1312 days of sentence credit, including 110 days for unnecessarily harsh conditions at Quantico  Marine Base Brig.  That’s about 3.5 years give or take.  Additionally, he will receive 5 days of sentencing credit for every 30 days of good behavior, and this works out to approximately 60 days per year.  Any sentence of less than 10 years will be served at a Regional Confinement Facility, such as the Midwest Joint Regional Correctional Facility on the grounds of Fort Leavenworth, KS.  This is not part of the big military prison there, but rather a separate facility.  PFC Manning was confined at MJRCF for his pre-trial confinement after transfer from QMB.  Any sentence over 10 years will be served at the US Disciplinary Barracks, which is the big military prison on Fort Leavenworth.

Once the trial is complete, a full record of the trial will be forwarded to the Commanding General of the Military District of Washington, who is the Convening Authority for this court-martial.  He may approve or disprove the findings (guilt or innocence) or the sentence in whole or in part.  Assuming that he approves a sentence in excess of one year of confinement or a punitive discharge (dishonorable or bad conduct discharge) the case will automatically be docketed with the Army Court of Criminal Appeals under Art. 66, UCMJ.  The CA may not increase the punishment adjudged.

ACCA may approve or disprove the findings or the sentence in whole or in part.   They can reduce the sentence, delete the sentence, or return the record of trial to the Convening Authority to convene a new hearing as appropriate.  Once ACCA rules, the accused may appeal to the Court of Appeals of the Armed Forces.  CAAF, assuming they hear the case, may act under the same strictures as ACCA.  The Government can also appeal the case to CAAF by having the The Adjutant General of the Army certify the case to CAAF.  In no case can either ACCA or CAAF increase the punishment.  Assuming that CAAF agrees to hear the case, and then finds against PFC Manning, he will have the right to appeal to the SCOTUS, but only if CAAF hears the case.  If CAAF does not hear the case, then appeal to SCOTUS is not permitted.

While all this is going on, Manning’s sentence will be reviewed by the Army Clemency and Parole Board, which may at their sole unreviewable discretion reduce or eliminate the sentence.

Again, all errors in the preceding are mine and mine alone.  Open Thread.

UPDATE: Accused Fort Hood shooter MAJ Nidal Hassan rested his defense case in his capital Court Martial without calling any witnesses or making any statement.

UPDATE:  Judge Lind has sentenced PFC Manning to 35 years according to persons tweeting form the trial.

UPDATE: Manning will be eligible for parole after 1/3 of his sentence is served.  So about 13 years.  With time off for sentencing credit, that works out to around 9.5 years before parole, and as I mentioned above, there are several levels of review yet to go.

Manning Sentencing Open Thread UPDATE Sentenced to 35 years.Post + Comments (218)

I would have posted something yesterday, but I was busy having a tornado shelter installed in my garage.

Again, for the record, I have consulted with Attorneys who practice at the military bar, both locally here in OKC and via email to others.  None of them are associated with the case in any way.  Any errors in my statements are mine and mine alone.  I try very hard to get what they tell me correct, but there’s a reason they are the lawyers and I am the grunt.

show full post on front page

Manning Trial Update and Open ThreadPost + Comments (52)

On Monday, the Trial Counsel rested their sentencing phase case in chief.  Yesterday, the Defense began their sentencing case, and then and this morning, the Defense put on two military psychiatrists, an Army Captain (O-3) who treated PFC Manning prior to his fateful deployment, and a Navy Captain (O-6) who interviewed PFC Manning extensively for his RCM 706 (sanity) board.  Both doctors were called by the Defense, and testified about their dealings with Manning as a patient and subject.  Both doctors stated that Manning has gender identity disorder and narcissistic personality traits.  Both, according to CNN and the Washington Post testified that these were contributing factors in PFC Manning’s misconduct.  I do not know at this time how they testified under cross examination by the Trial Counsel.  Note that the RCM 706 board found that PFC Manning was legally sane at the time he engaged his misconduct and was further able to assist in his own defense.

PFC Manning’s aunt and sister will apparently take the stand today, and the Defense has announced that PFC Manning will address the Court.  I haven’t been able to find anything as to whether it will be a sworn testimony, subject to cross examination and the penalties of perjury or it will be an unsworn statement (something not available in civilian court.)

As per all of these posts, you may find unofficial transcripts here, provided by the Freedom of the Press Foundation.  You might wish to consider tossing them some coin if you find their service useful.  Additionally, here is the link to the Army’s FOIA Reading Room for the Manning trial, including all of the unclassified case filings and rulings.

Also too, open thread

UPDATE: PFC Manning is addressing the Court right now.  I do not have any information as to whether or not it is the sworn or unsworn statement.  According to Breaking News twitter feed, “Bradley Manning tells court-martial he apologizes for his actions, says he hurt US – @Reuters”

UPDATE 2: PFC Manning’s statements to the Court are an unsworn statement, per AP.

show full post on front page

Manning Court Martial UpdatePost + Comments (133)

I’m not sure what was happening here earlier, but not being able to post gave me time to try out the new swing and whips er, lawn mower.

What’s up with you all?

Thursday was the first day of the sentencing phase of PFC Manning’s court-martial.  He was, you will all recall, acquitted of the Art. 104 specification for “Aiding the Enemy” which could possibly have resulted in his imprisonment for life.  On Thursday, the Government witness stated under direct examination that the Taliban had executed a village elder in one village and claimed that they had found the man’s name and information in the Wikileaks document cache.  On cross-examination, it was revealed that the witness, having searched that cache for that victim’s name, could not find the name anywhere.  The Judge sustained the Defense’s objection to that part of the testimony and struck it from the record and stated that she would not consider it in her sentencing deliberations.  On Friday, two State Department personnel were on the witness stand, and one testified that she had overseen the very expensive and time consuming process to move DoS secured traffic off of SIPRNet (the system that Manning compromised) and onto JWICS, a more secure system for TOP SECRET traffic.  She testified as to the disruption in service this caused the State Department, as well as the financial cost, and the ongoing degredation of service, due to the various restrictions on that system and those who access it.  Another State Department employee spoke about how several human rights activists in different places have stopped talking to them because their security can no longer be guaranteed, and how several people had to be extracted from their home countries and relocated to the US or to other locations for their safety.  The court went into a classified session with this witness still on the stand.

Additionally, Manning’s legal team, consisting of David Coombs and two JA officers, filed several motions in relation to the Judge’s verdict, seeking to merge various specifications (and thereby limit Manning’s exposure to confinement) under the theory that convictions on multiple charges and specifications for singular or ongoing acts (referred to as multiplicity) is unfair and probably unconstitutional.  This has been an ongoing issue in the military justice system for some time.  For example, Manning was convicted of improperly accessing a secured computer on a certain date under one charge/spec.  He was also convicted of stealing government property (data) on that date, under another charge/spec.  He was convicted under another charge/spec for unlawfully placing classified data on an information system not rated or secured for that purpose (his own personal laptop) on that same date.  And he was convicted of espionage as a charge/spec for transmitting that data to a foreign national not cleared to receive it, again on the same date.  And finally, he was convicted of one charge/spec of conduct that was prejudicial go good order and discipline on that same date for committing acts that were violations of US law.  It is Manning’s team’s contention that all of these acts were subordinate parts of one predicate crime, and that Manning should only be liable for the most serious crime, espionage, which would reduce his punitive exposure to 10 years from 30 years for this particular incident on that particular day.  If they are successful, and there’s reason to believe they will be at least partly successful, they could reduce Manning’s maximum exposure from 136 years to something in the neighborhood of 100 years.  It is likely however, that the court will not merge the Article 134 charges/specs with the other charges because Article 134 covers that conduct that is prejudicial to good order and discipline or that conduct that brings discredit upon the service.  That is a uniquely military crime and will likely be treated as such, in accordance with recent developments in the military justice system.  As always, mistakes or bad information from me is solely my responsibility and not the responsibility of people who have very graciously given of their time and expertise to me.

The Army has set up a FOIA reading room, where the public may peruse filings and rulings and other such here.  Some organization has been creating transcripts by court reporters with the court’s permission and posting them on the web twice daily, but I can’t find the link for that.

Well, that was interesting.Post + Comments (53)

The Judge, COL Denise Lind announced to the parties that she would have the verdict today.  It should be coming in around 2:00 PM Eastern time, but possibly sooner.  Since PFC Manning has already plead guilty to several charges and specifications as lesser included offenses to the original charges and specifications, there will be a sentencing phase, which will occur immediately after the verdict is passed and the findings phase is concluded.

The sentencing phase will be essentially, another trial.  The Trial Counsel will present a case for a certain maximal punishment, which will include the possibility of life without parole if the Aiding the Enemy spec is included.  The Defense will present a case to minimize that potential punishment as much as possible.  This will likely include a feature not found in civilian trials, the Unsworn Statement, in which the Accused will be allowed to address the Court, with assistance of Counsel and make a statement for the record that, because it is unsworn, is not subject to cross-examination or to penalty of perjury.  The Judge will then retire to determine the sentence.  Just for the charges to which he has plead guilty, PFC Manning faces a maximum of twenty years in confinement, Dishonorable Discharge, reduction to E-1, and total forfeiture of all pay and allowances.  He will get sentence credit for each day he has spent in pre-trial confinement, as well as an additional 110 days sentencing credit for the unnecessarily harsh conditions in which he was kept for part of his time in the Quantico Brig.

In the event that his sentence exceeds one year or includes a punitive discharge, review by the Army Court of Criminal Appeals of the findings and the sentence is automatic under Article 66, UCMJ.  This is another right that Civilians do not have, in addition to the rights of the Accused to petition the Convening Authority for clemency, under which the CA can also review findings and sentence.  In both cases, the ACCA or the CA may, at their sole unreviewable discretion, set aside the findings or the sentence in whole or in part.  In neither case can the sentence be increased beyond what the trial Judge issues.  Additionally, the Army Clemency Review Board may reduce the sentence as they see fit, and this is also a nonreviewable decision.  Assuming that PFC Manning appeals to the Court of Appeal for the Armed Forces, that court may also review the record and make findings with respect to findings and sentence of the Court-Martial, and may reduce or obviate the sentence as they see fit.  If CAAF reviews, then that opens the door to SCOTUS review.  If CAAF does not review the case, then SCOTUS does not have appellate jurisdiction, and SCOTUS has never reviewed the law (Art. 67-a, UCMJ) that limits their jurisdiction here.  Every single challenge to the constitutionality of Art. 67-a has been refused hearing by SCOTUS.  The information contained in this paragraph however, refers to events which are two to five years away from today.

Also too, Open Thread

 

UPDATE:  MANNING NOT GUILTY OF AIDING THE ENEMY.  Tweeted by @kgosztola, @NathanLFuller

NBCNews.com reports that the Judge found him “guilty of two other charges.”  update–Guilty of all other charges including theft of government property, and espionage.  That last one is included in military law under a UCMJ provision that makes violating federal criminal statues a criminal act under the UCMJ.  It could carry a possible life sentence.  The Sentencing phase will begin immediately–like, after a short recess.  This is not like civilian criminal court where there’s a break of several days to weeks.

UPDATE: Sentencing phase of the Court-Martial will begin tomorrow morning at 0930hrs, Eastern.  PFC Manning faces a maximum sentence of 136 years in confinement, reduction to E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and dishonorable discharge from the Army.

Manning Verdict Today–Acquitted of Aiding the Enemy, Guilty of all other charges.Post + Comments (168)